ESPN's Rittenberg snubs Stanzi in his player rankings?
by StoopsMyAss on Mar 9, 2010 1:53 PM CST
43 comments
So Adam Rittenberg of ESPN has listed a Big Ten postseason player rankings, based on past performance and future potential. He is down to #4, which is Brian Bulaga. But in projecting the final three there's not a lot left. There is no sign of Adrian Clayborn or Swinging Dick Stanzi and one has to think Clayborn will be in the final three....and there still is no sign of PSU's Odrick or UM's Graham. It looks like Stanzi is going to get snubbed, and if Stanzi gets snubbed while Kafka gets included then one has to ask: Will Stanzi enter the 2010 season under the media radar yet again?
Looks like he will.
0 recs |
43 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
I agree it's not a total snub to not include Stanzi in the top 30...but
I would argue that if you put Kafka in the Top 30 then you gotta put Stanzi in there. Stanzi will have every bit as much chance to make it at the next level as Kafka, if not more, and he was arguably as important to his team, arguably more (given Kafka’s back-up last year). Finally, Stanzi has more upside down the road than Kafka has…better arm, better NFL body, played in pro-style offense. NFL draft scout has Stanzi the #5 senior QB next year. Kafka was #11 this year.
"I’m sick of following my dreams. I’m just going to ask them where they’re going and hook up with them later." M.H.
Agree with all your points
but I think the more appropriate result would have been to exclude Kafka over including Stanzi.
For what its worth, I think Stanzi will likely be ranked in mid 20’s in the pre-season rankings.
Ankles! We don't need no stinking ankles!
by three and out the kok story on Mar 9, 2010 4:06 PM CST up reply actions
He has more pro potential, I'll give you that
I disagree with the rest of your post though. They put up very similar numbers despite Kafka having to shoulder much more of the load for NW and being surrounded by a lot less talent. I probably wouldn’t include either of them in the Top 30 (just on Iowa I think McNutt, DKJ, Moeaki, Richardson, and Edds were better choices, and none of them made it), but Kafka over Stanzi doesn’t strike me a totally egregious decision or anything.
I really don’t think Stanzi is suffering from a lack of media attention. He was pretty much the face of the team last year, even though I’d argue he wasn’t even one of our ten best players. He gets a ton of play out of his record as a starter, which I’d argue is as much (or more) due to the defense as anything he does. I like the guy a lot, but he’s been far from a great player thus far.
Here is the answer from Rittenberg himself
Stanzi wasn’t far outside the top 30, Alex, but I couldn’t look past his interceptions total. He deserves a lot of credit for stepping up in the fourth quarter, but let’s face it: Iowa’s defense bailed him out numerous times last fall. Most teams can’t survive a pick-six from their quarterback and win a game, but Iowa did so multiple times thanks to Norm Parker’s tremendous defense, and, to be fair, some clutch play from Stanzi. He’s got to clean up his game a bit before I include him in the top 30, but he certainly has the mental and physical ability to be a star in 2010.
by HeroPatriotStanzi on Mar 9, 2010 5:38 PM CST reply actions
On paper Stanzi is a very mediocre QB...there is no question about that
but given that Rittenberg himself included as criteria “future potential” I would subjectively rate him higher than Kafka. The thing that is going to be most intriguing to me is whether Stanzi takes a big leap this year. It doesn’t happen often. Sometimes QBs actually regress in their senior year but Stanzi has so much room to grow in terms of his accuracy, reading defenses, getting off to better starts, etc.
I wonder if Rittenberg places Clayborn first…I say no, I say 2nd.
"I’m sick of following my dreams. I’m just going to ask them where they’re going and hook up with them later." M.H.
I'm stunned Pryor isn't going to be 1st.
"Based on my estimates, it appears that Stanzi shall transcend the ages." - Cairo
by ReadingRambler on Mar 9, 2010 7:12 PM CST up reply actions
I assume Odrick will be next, then Clayborn, then Graham.
I must give Graham credit for Michigan not giving up 300 points in every game.
"Based on my estimates, it appears that Stanzi shall transcend the ages." - Cairo
by ReadingRambler on Mar 9, 2010 7:13 PM CST up reply actions
Lake the Posts
would like to have a word with you! After all, Kafka is clearly the best in the long line of jNWU QBs who have had long, distinguished careers as NFL bottom feeders fifth-string quarterbacks. 2015 will be Baseanz’s (don’t care enough to get the spelling right) year!!!!
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
Because he works for ESPN.
Duh.
"Based on my estimates, it appears that Stanzi shall transcend the ages." - Cairo
by ReadingRambler on Mar 9, 2010 9:44 PM CST up reply actions
I predict Rittenberg
Will soon be receiving a visit from one Captain America…J Leman himself. Nobody hates on his running mate and gets away with it.
Actually
I was fine with Rittenberg’s rankings until he had Decker from Minnesota at #10. Don’t get me wrong, I think Decker was the best WR in the Big Ten last year based on potential alone. But given the criteria that Rittenberg employs (on-field production + NFL potential), then Decker barely cracks the top 30. Decker was a singular talent, one of the best in the nation. But the simple fact remains that he was injured before the meat of the Big Ten schedule began and was thus unable to play, and his NFL career is very much in doubt because of said injury. This is a shame, because Decker was very, very good, but given the criteria that Rittenberg chooses to employ (criteria heavily skewed towards NFL potential, how else to explain Benn being ranked so high), then he wasn’t worth the #10 overall pick since his pro career (again, a true shame) is very much in doubt.
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
I wasn't very impressed with Decker.
The best secondary he actually played was either Penn State or Ohio State. He was injured early in the OSU game, but PSU just shut him down. And PSU isn’t known for lockdown defensive backs.
"Based on my estimates, it appears that Stanzi shall transcend the ages." - Cairo
by ReadingRambler on Mar 10, 2010 10:40 AM CST up reply actions
Adam Weber was throwing to him.
I wouldn’t trust Adam Weber to throw a baby shower without it getting Rick-sixed.
I got more rhymes than Wade Lookingbill's got dunks
Yeah...
But still.
Nah nevermidn, you win.
"Based on my estimates, it appears that Stanzi shall transcend the ages." - Cairo
by ReadingRambler on Mar 10, 2010 6:44 PM CST up reply actions
Sweet!
Who cares? Taking the motto of the team to a personal level, Fuck you, he’s American.
Stanzi was the heart and soul of an offense that was near the bottom of the Big XI in most categories, except wins – which is all we care about. Everyone in the country knows he scored 6 touchdowns for the opposition; he throws a damn pretty ball it just sometimes goes to the wrong team. If he cuts his TD/INT ratio from a 1/1 to a 2.5/1 and the team does as well as we all hope he will be All Big Ten, easily. He has to prove he can do that and Iowa has not been the hotbed of developing QB talent.
All that being said, Stanzi is the best quarterback (ie leader of a team) that we have had since Brad Banks, followed closely by Tate’s sophomore campaign. His statistics suck but none of us would trade him for just about anyone – he pisses that intangible quality “it.”
"Well of course, there's nothing better than being American!!!" - Ricky Americanzi, Jan. 5th, 2010
by The Bacon Explosion on Mar 10, 2010 11:09 AM CST reply actions
I would trade him for a whole bunch of people
I like the guy a lot, but he hasn’t prove that he’s an especially good QB yet. Drew Tate was miles better, and not just in his sophomore year when the team happened to win a bunch of games. Games are won by teams, not individuals. Stanzi has benefited a ton from having a great defense to back him up and minimize the impact of his mistakes.
I would rather have Stanzi in the fourth quarter than any Iowa QB in recent memory.
Beyond that, I tend to agree with you.
Hopefully he puts it together for more full games this season.
"I want to be a cowboy. I don't want to be a panda. Pandas are boring, stupid and boring. Bad panda!"
Well I guess that's the thing
I don’t think there’s any special about him that suddenly makes him better in the 4th quarter. Over a large enough sample size I think he’d probably wind up doing dumb shit in plenty of 4th quarters too, but so far he’s gotten kind of lucky and timed things well. Generally speaking QBs who are routinely good in the “clutch” over a long period of time are QBs who are good pretty much all the time. If he can just decide “oh hey, I should stop sucking now” in the 4th quarter, then why wouldn’t he just not suck the whole game?
Also he benefits a lot from a defense that keeps the game close enough for him to make up for the dumb shit he does later. On lots of teams those Pick-6s would be backbreakers.
I don’t think there’s any special about him that suddenly makes him better in the 4th quarter. Over a large enough sample size I think he’d probably wind up doing dumb shit in plenty of 4th quarters too, but so far he’s gotten kind of lucky and timed things well.
You’re never going to get a large enough sample size in college football. Most QBs would be lucky enough to play 40 games total and only a fraction of those are going to feature situations where fourth quarter comebacks are relevant. Iowa’s record when trailing in the 4th quarter was FUCKING AWFUL under a variety of KF QBs; Stanzi already has five wins in those circumstances (six if you include the 09 Wisco game — the teams were tied). Throw out the 09 UNI and PSU wins if you like (those were won/clinched by D/ST plays, obviously) but those other three wins is still as many or more than the rest of the KF QBs combined for most of the Aughts. I don’t see why he shouldn’t get a little love for that.
Is he horribly, maddeningly inconsistent? Of course. Is he a better overall QB than Drew Tate? No, I don’t think so. But in a close game in the fourth quarter, would I want Stanzi? Unquestionably.
I think saying he’s “gotten kind of lucky” or “timed things well” is a bit deceiving and fails to give him pretty much any credit.
Generally speaking QBs who are routinely good in the "clutch" over a long period of time are QBs who are good pretty much all the time. If he can just decide "oh hey, I should stop sucking now" in the 4th quarter, then why wouldn’t he just not suck the whole game?
If any of us knew the answer to that question, we’d probably have KOK’s job.
Also he benefits a lot from a defense that keeps the game close enough for him to make up for the dumb shit he does later. On lots of teams those Pick-6s would be backbreakers.
Granted. But someone has to go out and actually win the game and aside from Clayborn doing just that in the 09 PSU game, that’s been Stanzi.
"I want to be a cowboy. I don't want to be a panda. Pandas are boring, stupid and boring. Bad panda!"
Drew Tate benefitted from one of the better Iowa
defenses in recent memory. In 2004 Iowa defense was 11th in total defense.
"I’m sick of following my dreams. I’m just going to ask them where they’re going and hook up with them later." M.H.
by StoopsMyAss on Mar 10, 2010 12:24 PM CST up reply actions
Yes, but he was also still better individually than Stanzi has been
And that was true in 2005 too, when he was actually better than he was the year before.
They both benefitted
my point is that Tate is not distinguished as a guy who overcame bad defensive play. Tate was too “me” oriented for my taste. His last year he was 43rd nationally in QB rating. Not the leader that Stanzi is and I do expect bigger things from Stanzi next year. But we will see. I know some people just love Tate. I’m just not one of those peeps.
"I’m sick of following my dreams. I’m just going to ask them where they’re going and hook up with them later." M.H.
by StoopsMyAss on Mar 10, 2010 12:41 PM CST up reply actions
2006 Tate was also injured most of the year and had fucking terrible receivers.
"I want to be a cowboy. I don't want to be a panda. Pandas are boring, stupid and boring. Bad panda!"
Zach Mills played for Iowa in 2006?
"Based on my estimates, it appears that Stanzi shall transcend the ages." - Cairo
by ReadingRambler on Mar 10, 2010 12:51 PM CST up reply actions
I would not call Chandler, Brodell, Grigsby and Douglas terrible....
at least not by Iowa standards. But the runing back talent was way better than Iowa had last year. I loved Sims and Young. I think the team had terrible chemistry.
"I’m sick of following my dreams. I’m just going to ask them where they’re going and hook up with them later." M.H.
I have very mixed emotions on Chandler. But the rest...
Douglas seemed better than he was because he had actually catch more than one of every four balls thrown his way, unlike the other receivers on the team. Brodell didn’t emerge until the Minnesota and Texas games at the end of the season. Grigsby started off decent and got progressively worse. Watching him alligator arm pass after pass because he was scared of getting hit was one of the lowpoints of the decade.
The only WR corps that were as bad (or worse) than the 06 group were 03 (when Mo Brown was hurt; with Mo they were a middle-of-the-pack bunch) and 07 (who at least had the excuse of having no idea what they were fucking doing because they were almost all redshirt freshmen).
The RB talent was excellent on paper, although I recall Young, Sims, and Greene all being banged up at different points of the season.
I think the team had terrible chemistry.
Also true. There were a lot of things wrong with that ‘06 team. I still don’t know whether that team (talented but never able to get one the same page) was more or less frustrating than the 07 team (which was more your garden variety inexperienced/inept).
"I want to be a cowboy. I don't want to be a panda. Pandas are boring, stupid and boring. Bad panda!"
Exactly
Judging him by his senior year is ridiculous. His first two years he was one of the better QBs in the Big Ten. Then he got hurt, the rest of the team sort of fell apart around him, and he struggled a lot. Somehow that’s the only year people want to talk about with him.
And, Stoops, Grigsby was horrible, and Brodell had a ton of trouble catching the ball consistently early in his career. Actually, all those guys you listed were pretty drop prone, other than Chandler, and he even had his moments.
I recall you as a big Chandler fan?
I am not going to construct a big argument that Tate was this or that compared to Stanzi. QB play is allows for unique interpretation. The college QB is more art than science in my book. Terrelle Pryor and Daryl Clark prove that to me. I think Tate played out of this world in 2004 and then I think he flatlined. Stanzi may do the same.
"I’m sick of following my dreams. I’m just going to ask them where they’re going and hook up with them later." M.H.
Big fan in that i think I like him more than most people here
In general I think he was a very good receiving TE, but he had a few games where he got the dropsies here and there.
Also, the only way Tate was worse in his second year than he was his first is if you’re judging him purely by wins/losses, which is a terrible way to look at individual players. His stats were better across the board.
Wins/losses
I would rather have a not as great individual QB in Stanzi and go 11-2 than a statically superior Tate going 7-5 followed by 6-7.
IMHO Stanzi is a significantly superior leader which translates to wins in a lot of cases.
"Well of course, there's nothing better than being American!!!" - Ricky Americanzi, Jan. 5th, 2010
by The Bacon Explosion on Mar 11, 2010 7:54 AM CST up reply actions
I would rather have a team that goes 11-2 than 7-5
I don’t think one player is the reason for that difference though, which is my point.
I don't think one player is the reason for the difference either
my point is that you have a much greater chance going 11-2 with a leader at quarterback then with a guy the team doesn’t respect regardless of talent level of the quarterback.
"Well of course, there's nothing better than being American!!!" - Ricky Americanzi, Jan. 5th, 2010
by The Bacon Explosion on Mar 11, 2010 11:07 AM CST up reply actions
Can we just say that QBs get too much credit AND too much blame?
Stanzi does appear to be a very good leader, but this team has had some other key leaders the last few years, too — King, Angerer, Clayborn. I’m not sure how vocal Edds or Bulaga were, but they seemed pretty well-respected.
I don’t buy the bad leadership/lack of respect thing in 2005. As much as it gets lumped in with 2006-2007, that was much more a team that had miserable luck. Maybe the 2004 squad used up all the good luck — I dunno. But flip a couple plays in the Michigan and Northwestern losses and that’s a 9-2 regular season. Some years you get those breaks (02, 04, 09), some years you don’t.
2006 did seem to have a lack of leadership — but it was team-wide. I don’t think there were any veterans that really stepped up to lead the way. Klink may have been a nice guy, but he didn’t seem to command respect the way King or Angerer did.
"I want to be a cowboy. I don't want to be a panda. Pandas are boring, stupid and boring. Bad panda!"
Chemistry is not something you can predict or control
which is why college football is so fun to watch. because chemistry has profound effect (it seems to me anyway). This team in 2009 had lots of chemsitry. Watching ARob cheer on Wegher on the sidelines was awesome. I think Stanzi sets a tone. Its true value cannot be measured unfortunately. Only speculated on…
"I’m sick of following my dreams. I’m just going to ask them where they’re going and hook up with them later." M.H.
Right or wrong
The QB is the leader of the team. I remember several games when Tate came over to the sideline and started screaming at everyone, not just the offense (jNW game in particular). You could see the players had little respect for him even after his back flipping touchdown.
Stanzi is the opposite, at least as it appears from the TV coverage. He was by Vandenberg for most of the OSU game which leads me to believe he was helping him play out of his mind sans a couple of throws. The fact the 2009 team didn’t kill Stanzi after the 3rd quarter of the Indiana game indicates to me they would have followed him anywhere.
Tate appeared to be a self centered jerk who, while talented, never was able to step up as a leader on the team. Stanzi has developed into a team leader and is doing well in that role I hope he continues the progress in his senior year, he has a great foundation.
"Well of course, there's nothing better than being American!!!" - Ricky Americanzi, Jan. 5th, 2010
by The Bacon Explosion on Mar 11, 2010 7:41 AM CST up reply actions
You’re not some flash-in-the-pan corner or receiver or even Julian Washington. You’re a goddamn quarterback!
You know what that means?
It’s the top spot, kid. It’s the guy who takes
the fall. It’s the guy everybody’s looking at
first, the leader of a team who will support you
when they understand you. Who will break
their ribs and their noses and their necks for
you because they believe. ‘Cause you make
them believe. That’s a quarterback.
by HawkeyeRecon on Mar 14, 2010 6:25 PM CDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
